This Senate Race Was Supposed To Be A "Sure Thing" But If Hickenlooper Wins The Primary It Won't Be
>
On Friday, Elizabeth Warren released a list of congressional candidates she had just endorsed. The list included progressive champions like Jamaal Bowman (NY), Mike Siegel (TX), Charles Booker (KY) and Julie Oliver (TX). I'm sure all of them are overjoyed at her backing-- even if it's a little late in the game for Bowman and Booker, whose primaries are tomorrow. But whatever goodwill and cred with the progressive netroots, the endorsements generated for Warren, it was squandered when she stepped all over herself by adding grotesque corporate whore John Hickenlooper to the list.
Widely hated by liberals and reformers for his virulent anti-progressive mania-- both as a dismally failed presidential candidate and in his current Schumeristic senatorial campaign-- Hick, AKA, Frackenlooper, has virtually nothing in common with any of Warren's other endorsed candidates and not much in common with Warren herself. I noticed that the #1 Warren-backing outside group in the country, the PCCC, quickly sent out an e-mail to their list emphasizing that they not only back Romanoff but that in their opinion Hickenlooper is "one of the worst corporate Dems" and reminded their supporters that he is "the guy who ran for president and consistently attacked Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders from the right. This is one of the most winnable Senate seats in the nation, and there's no excuse to elect a right-wing Democrat. Andrew Romanoff's running on Medicare For All and a Green New Deal. John Hickenlooper opposes those, supports police policies that encourage violence while proclaiming 'every life matters,' and is now embroiled in an ethics/corruption scandal that could hurt our chances of winning this easy-to-win race in November." BOOM!
In a spat with Warren on the debate stage, he hissed that maybe Medicare for All could be achieved in 15 years. They'll be dead in 15 years and the way to achieve Medicare for All sooner is by defeating candidates like Cory Gardner and John Hickenlooper and electing candidates like Andrew Romanoff. It isn't that complicated. Hickenlooper has finally stopped calling progressives "Stalinists," probably because he's running against a progressive who happens to be named Romanoff.
Yesterday, Politico's James Arkin pointed out that "Hickenlooper has stumbled in the closing weeks of Colorado’s Senate primary, creating openings for his opponent and Republicans that have unsettled a critical race for Democrats in their bid to recapture the Senate. Democrats acknowledge Hickenlooper has made serious mistakes on what was supposed to be a glide path to the Democratic nomination. After being cited for contempt this month for initially failing to appear before Colorado’s Independent Ethics Commission, Hickenlooper was fined $2,750 for two violations dating back to his second term as governor. He’s also apologized for comments about race, including responding to a question about the Black Lives Matter protests in a recent forum by saying the phrase means 'every life matters,' echoing a common refrain among conservatives."
Republicans are all over Hickenlooper's stumbles, pummeling him as they anticipate gleefully that he will be the easy target for Gardner in November and now, the primary has tightened considerably with all the momentum shifting towards Romanoff.
Not really that "mysterious"-- Schumer's paw prints are all over it |
A sewer money SuperPAC, led by Schumer and the DSCC, Let's Turn Colorado Blue, dropped several million dollars into a jihadist-like smear campaign against Romanoff. After defying a subpoena and dodging nearly two dozen debates, Frackenlooper is now hiding behind Schumer's sewer-money attacks, claiming, deceitfully, he doesn't know who's paying for ads.
Arken explained how "Romanoff appeals to primary voters eager for his message of more radical change, including the Green New Deal and Medicare for All. He argues a middle of the road approach doesn’t meet the moment and has said Hickenlooper’s ethics issue is a problem. 'If you break the law, defy a subpoena and get held in contempt, you jeopardize our chances to hold the seat,' Romanoff said in a interview."
Schumer is trying to replace a conservative Republican Senate with a conservative Democratic Senate. With the exception of Steve Bullock in Montana, Schumer's candidates all suck shit. Democratic primary voters are largely unaware that they're voting for a pack of Kyrsten Sinemas. (Sinema was handpicked by Schumer in 2018 and has been the most consistently anti progressive Democrat in the Senate ever since, the closest thing to a Trump-enabler among congressional Democrats.) It still isn't too late to turn the tide, by supporting Andrew Romanoff, which you can do by clicking on the Blue America 2020 Senate thermometer above and contributing what you can.
Labels: Andrew Romanoff, Chuck Schumer, Colorado, Cory Gardner, John Hickenlooper, primaries, progressives vs reactionaries, Senate 2020
2 Comments:
"Hillary's got this in the bag!"
"Bernie could win this thing."
"Joe's the most electable"
How many times are we supposed to fall for this BS before enough figure out it's always a lie?
Until all the potted geraniums die and all that are left are the few sentient beings.
that said, it really doesn't matter. if fracky wins or loses, scummer would be in line to be senate tyrant. and the senate tyrant is the only one who determines what gets done, never gets done, and even gets talked about on the floor.
so put in romanoff or fracky... it doesn't make a guppy's turd of a difference.
it's not either guy from CO. It's scummer. it's the party. it's the money.
Post a Comment
<< Home